[dsdp-dd-dev] FW: [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback on the europa upda

["Williams, Ted" <ted.williams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony,

Pascal voiced concern that the name of the IPXact feature is cryptic.
Please see below. Would you like to make any changes before the next
Europa RC?

ted 


-----Original Message-----
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Pascal Rapicault
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 7:56 PM
To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Feedback on the europa update site


Hi,

Starting from a platform binary download, I decided to see what I could
get from Europa.
Overall I was pretty amazed by the amount of stuffs that I could get but
still a bit disappointed to see that Subversive and PDT were missing.
Too bad we can't force people in the train :-)

I have noticed a bunch of weirdness for which I have / will open bug
reports against various components. But here are a few general points:

- I found pieces that I was not expecting, did the rules changed for
      - SDKs for the following components DLTK Core SDK (in the
enablement), Corona client and servers, EMF, SDO, JET, EODM, OCL, UML2,
DTP, DLTK Ruby, DLTK Tcl, Remote system explorer extender S
      - Examples:  ECF

- A lot of features had a lot of cryptic names, not easing the
readability of the list, for example:
      - EODM
      - Dynamic Languages Toolking (DLKT) Ruby
      - IPExact Editor and Checker
      - TPTP Tracing and Profiling Tools project (in fact all the TPTP
features say TPTP in the name)

- The categorization of features could be improved
      - Could / should DALI be moved to the Java Development, what about
some
      - Some features of "Remote Access and Device Development" could be
moved under C/C++
      - Should CVS be moved under the "Collaboration" category?

- Description (blob of text under the features list) and number of
features not user friendly. Some components just have too many features
presented to the end user:
      - DTP is just overkill for an end user. Could not we have just two
entries, general Data tools and SQL based data tools, and put all the
enablement features in a sub category?
      - Corona, do we really want to make the server installable from
here?
what would one do with a server installed in such a way?
      - Remote system explorer, same problem than DTP.
      - Overall the descriptions should be reviewed to help the user
makes a choice whether or not he/she needs this functionality. If no
good description can be found, then the feature should probably move
into the "enablement feature" category :-) Also we should probably using
the word "feature" in the description.

HTH,

PaScaL

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev